Monday, December 30, 2013

True to my word, this week’s article is all about the
combat. Specifically, about being a player in combat. When swords swing,
daggers fly, hammers crunch, arrows hit, and axes cleave, D&D becomes a wholly
different game. This is the part where some people thrive, and others simply hope
to survive. Either way, combat certainly plays a huge role in almost every
story and it is the primary source for character experience and gaining treasure.

On the player’s side of things, your role in combat will
depend a great deal on the class of character you are playing. And here’s an
important tip: Know your role! I can’t tell you how many times I've seen
players step outside of their character’s role in combat and wonder why things
aren't working out. Even the most forgiving and accommodating DM will
eventually teach the character that thinks they can “do everything” a lesson.
I’m not trying to say that these roles are set in stone and there is no room
for improvisation or thinking outside of the box, but classes do have
limitations and I believe that they should apply more than 50% of the time.

For clarity, I break down the roles into four types as
follows: Striker (Rogues, some Bards, some Fighters, Monks, and melee Rangers),
Artillery (Some Mages and Clerics, ranged Fighters and ranged Rangers), Support
(Some Clerics, Druid, Some Mages and Bards) and Tanks (Some Fighters,
Barbarians, and Paladins). Despite my best efforts, I’m sure that there are
many opportunities for crossovers and people could cite examples where a Mage
could be a Striker or a Barbarian could be Artillery. Despite this, these are
the roles that feel work the best for their classes and are the most productive
in game.

Let’s take a closer look at each one:

Striker- These
characters move in quickly and quietly, do a fair amount of damage, and then
slip out. They attack the enemy at odd and unexpected angles and keep them off
balance. Sometimes they also work as distractions, keeping the foes focusing on
them while the real damage gets done elsewhere. The weakness of the Striker
comes into play when they get stuck or surrounded and can’t use their mobility
and stealth to their advantage.

Artillery-
These characters hit hard and can do more damage than any other group in the
game. They stay out of the heart of battle and prefer to overlook everything.
This gives them a unique perspective to see the fighting as whole and they can
usually predict when things are shifting for better or for worse. Their
weakness lies in the age old saying “you can give it but you can’t take it”.
The typical Artillery character trades off defence for offence and can be taken
out of the fight with a few good hits.

Support- These
characters help other characters or harm the foes in non-damaging ways. They
can heal, they can add extra hit points, they can buff (improve stats), they
can add protection, and they can do all of these things in opposite to enemies.
Most people don’t grasp the usefulness of a +1/-1 until I mention that +1/-1 to
a D20 is a 5% increase/decrease. The weakness of a Support character is their
lack of offence. Don’t look to these folks when the big damage numbers need to
be posted.

Tanks- These
characters are probably the most misunderstood. Their role is to take damage (not
deal it out). They exist to hold the line, take the big hits that other
characters can’t, and make the ultimate sacrifice for the party if need be. If
your tanks aren't the first to go into negative hit points during a battle,
then something is not being done right. Their weakness lies in their lack of versatility.
These characters don’t have many tricks up their sleeves and if battles go long
they can become burnt out.

It is important for characters to realize that how they
conduct themselves outside of combat can be very different from how they need
to operate inside. Here are two examples:

1) A dramatic, flamboyant Bard can be the life of the
party (pun intended) at almost every roleplaying opportunity but in combat that
Bard will not last very long standing toe to toe against a clan of Orcs.
Instead, use him/her as a subdued Striker to confuse and distract the enemy while
the Artillery goes to work.

2) A Paladin in full-plate armor wielding a large
shield may be very conservative in roleplaying situations; however, in combat,
he/she can be the central figure of the group and should not be running around as a
Striker. Not only is it terribly loud (all that clanking and scraping) but it
is inefficient. Instead, make him/her the Tank that anchors the battle and holds
the ground for the others.

While it is my personal belief that all plans can go out
the window in the blink of an eye, strategy and leadership can make the
difference between winning the battle cleanly, or winning the battle with the
loss of a character. Part of working as a team in combat is knowing everyone’s
strengths and weaknesses and that means everyone knowing their roles. This also
cuts down on a lot of the confusion in combat and was the one part of 4th
Edition that I thought the designers got right. Combat is sometimes too
confusing when everyone is running around without a clear purpose. It can be
stressful keeping track of everything for the DM and it can be hard on PCs when
battles don’t go their way. I also think this is the main reason why some
players dislike combat. They have a hard time understanding the chaos and can’t
picture what is happening as clearly as they can roleplaying. The answer, I
think, is for the PCs to have an idea of what they need to accomplish going
into a battle and for the DMs to be on top of things when it comes to description,
explanation, and combat pacing.

(Speaking of combat for the DMs, I will cover that in
next week’s article. Cheers!)

Monday, December 23, 2013

In this week’s article I want to explore the many facets of
roleplaying. I'll be tackling combat next but right now it’s all about the interaction which usually leads to
action.

In my head, roleplaying can be defined as: Any interaction
in which the PCs engage, in character, outside of combat. Granted, that’s a
very broad definition and can use some specifics. Roleplaying can include but
is not limited to: talking with other PCs, talking to NPCs, speaking/communicating
with monsters, investigating, planning, strategics, scheming, haggling,
negotiating, asking the DM questions, acting, reading aloud, and just plain
trying to make people laugh. For many, it is the primary purpose and the
backbone of D&D. It is undoubtedly the core social aspect of the game and,
as far as I’m concerned, it’s what sets D&D apart from a mountain of MMOs,
console, and miniature games.

Unfortunately, many players have trouble with roleplaying
and their reasons are as varied as the stars. Sometimes, the issue is with the
DM. For whatever the reason, the PCs are not being presented with good
roleplaying opportunities. This can usually be seen in unexperienced DMs who
aren't themselves comfortable yet with roleplaying or running it. In other
cases, the PCs don’t engage in roleplaying because of their own reservations.
New players may be shy, uncomfortable, and taken aback by the idea that they
not only have to “play” this character but they may also be responsible to talk
like them and think like them in fast-paced interactions, some of which may
determine the outcome of the whole adventure. Yikes!

At the same time, many of the people who play D&D, and
this is in no way a criticism, can suffer from social deficiencies. Gamers are
quite often socially awkward and that’s part of the appeal of playing these
games in the first place. They give many people an opportunity to say things
and do things they wouldn't normally have the ability or the will to say in
public. In many ways, D&D is an escape, a venue to release inner demons,
and a kind of therapy, for thousands. However, these changes and breakthroughs
neither come quickly nor easily. Roleplaying is a radical concept in the evolution
of D&D from a tabletop miniature game (chainmail) to a truly interactive
social game. It is also a major factor behind my personal enjoyment of the
game. Nothing delights me more as a DM to see a PC have that epiphany moment
when they fully become their character, even if just for a few minutes. It is
exciting, dynamic, and it heightens the games of everyone around them, myself
included. It is made even sweeter by seeing those dungeoneers who are coming
out of their psychological and social shells for the first time. It can be very
empowering for them and very gratifying as both a DM and as a human being.

So, with all of
that being said, how do PCs become better roleplayers? As with so many things,
the answer lies in the little things. Just as writers have to get into the
heads of their characters, so must players. Ask yourself the small questions
constantly: What am I seeing? What I am hearing? What am I smelling? What does
this person/thing look like? What do they
think? And occasionally ask yourself the big questions: What does my character
(not I) want? Who are they? How would they (not I) do this? And after you come
up with the answers, don’t be afraid to follow through.

And even more important: Don’t worry about the rules!
(they’re more like guidelines anyway) A good DM will ignore the rules for good
roleplaying. And, what’s more, good roleplaying will make you the DMs best
friend. When a PC roleplays their character properly, it frees up the DM. There
is less pressure on the DM to make the adventure interesting because the
players are basically entertaining themselves. Instead of prompting and pushing
the PCs for action, suddenly the PCs are self encouraging and the DM’s
work is cut in half. To throw in a modified cliche: Don’t ask what the
adventure can do for you, but what you can do for the adventure!

You don’t need to be top of your drama class to roleplay.
You simply need to be sympathetic to the personality, needs, and desires of the
character you are playing. If that character is a lot like you are in real
life, then so be it. If your character is nothing like you, then run with it.
Take chances, get into trouble, push the limits. Good DMs will pick up on your enthusiasm and
encourage your organized chaos. Some of the best campaigns I have ever
witnessed included several tangents and plot twists created by the players as opposed to the DM. Keep in mind that bringing an adventure to life is not the
sole responsibility of the DM. As a player, if you have the attitude that I am
going to sit back and see what comes my way, you are missing out on a
fundamental part of D&D. Instead, your outlook should be more like: Here I
am world, ready or not! Just like the true heroes of history, you have to get
out there and make your own statement, make some noise!

Take heart in knowing
that if you overstep or go too far the DM will bring you back. And should your
character suffer the ultimate fate because of your “reckless” actions, fear not
because I’m sure there will be a new character waiting for you right around the
corner. What have you really got to lose? Nothing but some time. And what could you gain? Stories to tell, confidence,
excitement, friendship, and hours of laughing your ass off! It’s not only what D&D is
about, but life itself. Let your credo be those immortal words from Malcolm
Reynolds: “I aim to misbehave.”

Tuesday, December 17, 2013

Well
they are a tricky subject aren’t they? From the tales of Beowulf (PDF version here) to the modern CGI
Smaug, Dragons have captured the imagination for hundreds of years. Some DMs
like to have at least one in every campaign, some players don’t feel as though
they’ve really played the game unless they get to fight one, and others still
won’t touch them at all, despite being 50% of the title track. In this article,
we’ll take a closer look at these magnificent and intimidating icons.

Part 1: History

The
original designers of D&D were Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson and both men
drew heavily from the popular works of fantasy fiction available to them during
the 1960’s. Works from such authors as: Jack Vance (Wiki), Poul Anderson (Wiki), and a
newfound popularity for more traditional reading such as the Arthur Legend,
Beowulf, and the works of Lewis Carroll (For more info...). Interestingly enough, Gygax stated in
an interview by Dragon Magazine that D&D was influenced very little by
J.R.R. Tolkien. He admitted that certain elements from his books were added to
the game but only for “popularity”. (DRAGON #95) Of course this may have just been a conscious effort
to stave off copyright issues.

So, if
we look at Dragons in particular, Beowulf seems to have some of the best references
for what would become a typical D&D Dragon:

“The
Beowulf dragon is the earliest example in literature of the typical European
dragon and first incidence of a fire breathing dragon.[9] But the
characterization goes beyond fire breathing: the Beowulf dragon is described
with Old English terms such as draca (dragon), and wyrm (worm, or serpent), and
as a creature with a venomous bite.[10] Also, the Beowulf poet created a dragon
with specific traits: a nocturnal, treasure hoarding, inquisitive, vengeful,
fire breathing creature.”

-Wikipedia

So, when
it did come time to create an original creature for AD&D, the designers
went for some basic archetypes. Dragons were large, intelligent reptiles with wings
and breath weapons. And, for the sake of variety and possibly to sell more miniatures,
Dragons were given multiple colors with different personalities and attacks to
match. The original colors were white, black, green, blue, red, and gold. Very
few were considered to be of good alignment, most were considered neutral, and
some downright evil.

As the
game evolved into 2nd and 3rd edition, dragons became much
more versatile and numerous. So much so that by 4th edition there were
more than twenty different types of Dragons and their personalities were as
varied as imaginable.

Part 2: Roleplaying An Icon (For the
DMs)

When compared
to your average PC or NPC, Dragons are supposed to be on an entirely different
level. Cunning, devious, masterminds with size, strength, magic, and fighting
ability rolled into one impressive and almost god like package. Think of Superman’s
body with Batman’s mind. This can be daunting for DMs. After all, and I don’t
think I’m divulging any huge secret here, most DMs are not super geniuses. However,
particular planning, excellent execution, and inspired improvisation can make
for a very impressive substitute. When I think ahead to an encounter my PCs are
going to have with a Dragon, I try to keep three things in mind:

a)Make the encounter worth something.
Dragons should not be thrown in on a whim or as a vehicle for “Deus Ex Machina”.
It cheapens the affect Dragons should have on PCs and it smacks of laziness.

b)Keep conversations with Dragons
short yet memorable. I’m thinking of quality over quantity. When a Dragon
speaks it never wastes any of its words. Also, the longer a DM drags the
encounter with a Dragon out the more opportunity there is to make them look
silly/dull.

c)When a Dragon makes a threat or a
promise, it keeps it. PCs have to learn, some of them the hard way, that to
insult, offend, or deceive a Dragon has very grave consequences. If ever there
was an excuse to make an example out of someone, this type of encounter would
be it.

I also
find that the most important aspect of encountering a Dragon, or any epic
creature for that matter, is the buildup to the encounter. While it can be a supreme shock for
the PCs to encounter a Dragon without any warning, telling them outright that a
Dragon exists in this campaign and you are most likely to encounter it will heighten
the anticipation. Throw in some references, maybe a survivor of a previous
encounter, or a story told by the hearth of an inn. The PCs will do most of the
building-up work for you, all you have to do is deliver.

Part 3: To Slay or Not to Slay (For the PCs)

Going
head to head against a Dragon can be the most exciting, terrifying, and
important encounter in all of D&D. You just get a sense when fighting this
epic creature that death is right around the corner. Even those who have played
this game for decades dare not slouch when a Great Wyrm is present.

Stealth
is always tried but usually fails; Traps are sometimes set but have little success;
and diplomacy is often attempted but you are dealing with a creature who thinks
of the world as a giant chess match and is planning three moves ahead of you. Intimidation
is totally out of the question. This leaves you with three fundamental options:
Fight, Flight, or Surrender. The option that your group chooses will say a lot
about them and the outcome of the campaign.

The
group that chooses to fight may think very highly of themselves and feel as
though this beast is an affront to everything they stand for. Perhaps this
Dragon is pure evil and has done things to inspire the group to rid the world of a flying horror. The group that chooses to flee have doubts concerning their
abilities or simply value their lives over the potential rewards. Words such as
“maybe when we’re higher level” might get thrown about. And finally, the group
that surrenders may be the bravest of all. To submit themselves to the will of
such an infamous beast could spell their doom or it could be the beginning of a
spectacular adventure. This option was explored thoroughly in the writings of
R.A. Salvatore during the Promise of the
Witch-King (Wiki).

However
you play or run an encounter with a Dragon, I hope that everyone ups their game
a little. Moments and memories playing this game can last a lifetime if the feeling
is powerful enough, and Dragons are certainly a very good foundation.

Have you
had a memorable encounter with a Dragon as either a player or a DM? Feel free
to comment about it below!

Friday, December 13, 2013

If you've spent any time as a Dungeon/Game Master, you know that an adventure or even a
whole campaign can run off the rails quickly and with unknowable consequences. This
is usually due to the players and their wacky ideas but every so often a DM can
make the wrong move and regret it. In that regard, here are three things to
keep in mind and save yourself from stepping in it:

#1-Don’t hand out magic items like Halloween
candy.

This can be very attractive at first. The
DM feels like being generous and

maybe the players deserve a really great reward
for accomplishing a difficult
task. However, the folly of this issue will eventually rear its ugly head.
Soon magic is flying everywhere and level four characters are

taking out level
eight monsters. This can also come back to haunt the DM

in the form of PC
expectations. For example, if you hand out +3 swords by

level four, what are
they going to be expecting by level six or ten? And to

make the situation
worse, some DMs (myself included in the past) make

the mistake of snatching
back the items at the last minute via dispel

magic, theft, or even killing the
character off. This is only a short term

solution if you don’t stop the source
of the problem. It’s also a great way

to make your players hate you for a very
long time and with good reason.

Instead: Make magic
items count for something.

When
you give out magic items make them small yet useful. Give the PC with the worst
AC the +1 cloak of protection. Give the PC with the really nasty DEX the +1
boots. Don’t let the min-max PCs become superheroes, when their party mates can’t
even skip rope without falling over. It is also helpful to spread the wealth
around. Don’t give the Knight in the party the +1 armor, the +1 sword, and the
+1 STR ring, when all the Rogue has is a potion of invisibility. To prevent
this, I developed a 1-in-3 system. Under this system I am trying to give each
character in my party one magical item for every three levels of experience.
Thus by level nine, each PC has three items. This seems to be a good balance
and keeps the magic respectable.

#2- Don’t choose the rules over the story.

As a DM, one of my main goals is to weave all of the
character’s backstories, aspirations, and adventures into one (relatively) cohesive
story. This brings satisfaction to me as a DM, and it brings a sense of
accomplishment to the PCs. However, and without fail, the rules of the game
will always attempt to ruin your best laid plans. You have a monster that needs
to take the PCs hostage? Well they just chopped his head off with a critical!
You want the PCs to fall into a trap? Too bad, they just passed all of their
near impossible DEX checks. And the opposite is true as well! Such as the PC
with the best CHR score rolling a one during the most crucial negotiation of
the campaign. While a few of these happenings can be seen as opportunities to
expand the game, too many can sour the soup.

Instead: Overrule the
rules, when necessary.

Sometimes you gotta’ take the bull by the horns. When
something absolutely needs to happen,
I usually take the dice and the numbers right out of the equation and go into
what I like to call “narration mode”. This is where I ask the PCs to describe
what they are doing in detail and we act it out like a script. I find this not
only eliminates the randomness, but PCs actually enjoy the opportunity to
roleplay such an intense scene, regardless of the outcome.

#3- Don’t go combat/roleplaying crazy.

If
asked, most players will tell you how they like their games. Some like a little
roleplaying with their combat and some a little combat with their roleplaying.
Don’t fall into the trap of diving deep into either one. A campaign with too
much roleplaying will seem dull and drawn out to the blood mongers, while too
much combat will stifle those players who are anxious to show off their
interaction skills.

Instead: Balance out
your games.

I
always aim for a balance, and by balance I mean 60% combat and 40% roleplaying.
Is it always possible to accomplish this? No. Sometimes combats run long and
sometimes roleplaying sessions can snowball into huge monstrosities, especially
when a tangent pops up that you weren't expecting. Sometimes the people in your
group are new and might be shy to the whole roleplaying aspect, ergo they might be skimmed
over for combat that is far less awkward. This is all perfectly fine
in moderation. As a DM, your chief concern should be your audience, and
that means your players. Don’t force situations on them, but don’t shy away
from pushing their comfort zones either. It may take some trial and error
but when you finally find the sweet spot your games will not only be fun, they
will also be memorable.

Wednesday, December 11, 2013

So now the playtest for D&D Next has officially reached its conclusion (The Next Phase), now begins the winter of our discontent. Or perhaps, I should say the winter of our paranoia. Allow me to explain...

For some, myself included, this playtest has been seen as a great success. The measurement for that success can be quantified in two ways: 1) D&D Next seems to have very little to do with 4th Edition; and 2) The game designers for D&D Next have not only been listening to the playtesters but have also been implementing their suggestions. I personally feel that this D&D by committee was the way to go. It engaged the Dragoneers (that's my own word for people who play D&D) in unprecedented numbers. Suddenly the basement-bound and the closeted dice-rollers had a voice! And they continue to share their opinions by the hundreds even now (D&D Next Forums).

But, as suggested in article "The Next Phase", the goblins and ogres, elves and gnomes at Wizards have now taken over for a few months of tweaking, tinkering, and tampering. That's where my paranoia kicks in because, just like WWII France, it only takes a few months for everything to go wrong. What will they change? What will they keep? What will the final product look like?

In theory, if you figure that the last playtest packet will form the foundation for the final product, then we may be in for something really special. From my view of the playtest, D&D Next is blending together a sweet cocktail of the best from every edition that has preceded it. This makes for a dynamic, easy to learn system, with just the right balance of opportunity to combat and opportunity to role-play. Personally, I would feel great about releasing that last playtest packet as the final product with just a few bells and whistles and art work.

Sadly, I fear that the wooden shoes will be flying during these last few months (look it up!) and things may not pan out as well as I hope. What really scares me is the idea that some of the design team over at Next have to conform the game to the expectations of their masters (i,e. Wizards and ultimately Hasbro). Unfortunately, this means the supreme commercialization of the product in as many permutations as can be humanly conceived. Put simply, the fear is they might kill the game to make more money.

Part of my beef with 4th edition, and the beef of many others, was the amount of planning and purchasing involved to run a game "properly". This included the inclusion of books, supplements, adventures, power cards, tiles, and countless miniatures. I swear that planning a 4th edition campaign sometimes felt like I was making the calculations to land Armstrong on the moon with all of the expenses. For clarification, let's break this down by the numbers:

Purchasing: I would respectfully submit that the average PC of 4th Edition had to buy around $300.00 in materials to play and the average DM around $1000.00. Maybe this is not that much considering that you could be entertained for hundreds of hours, but still staggering when compared to other roleplaying games. For a struggling economy and historically high unemployment numbers, this is quite intimidating.

Planning: In 4th Edition, your average night of game play (3 or 4 hours) required a minimum of 3 to 4 hours to plan out. Compare this with the fact that back in 2nd Edition the planing for the same night of game time might have been an hour at most. Thus you can see why many DMs were turned off. In my opinion, if the game is not as fun for the DMs to run as it is for the PCs to play, it will not survive.

Thus, imagine my surprise and pleasure to find out that the D&D Next playtest was free and simple! It offered to free up my planning time, it offered to cost me nothing except printing fees, and the fun was back! To date, I have tried out D&D Next with as many as thirty players, including two campaigns spanning more than seventy hours each and the results have been impressive. With the exception of those few people who enjoyed the overly detailed, strategic style of 4th Edition (yes Virginia, they do exist!) or those folks who feel that 3.5 will never be topped (that's what a lot of people said about 2nd Edition), I have had few complaints. In fact, I have taken note of the compliments such as: "It's so easy to learn!", "That's just like we used to play.", "Oh! This is a lot of fun!", and many more.

Hopefully, what we will end up having is even better than the playtest. But until that fateful day when the books arrive and we get to see what has changed, my paranoia will remain seated upon a throne in my mind laughing down at me and proclaiming that Murphy's Law shall prevail. However, if that happens, I shall be more than happy to carry on with what I already have: a playtest that I love. Wizards and Company, take note.